International Journal of Neutrosophic Science

Journal DOI

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS

Submit Your Paper

2690-6805ISSN (Online) 2692-6148ISSN (Print)

Volume 22 , Issue 1 , PP: 31-44, 2023 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article

A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration

Ather Abdulrahman Ageeli 1 *

  • 1 Management Department, Applied College, Jazan University, Jazan, KSA - (atherageeli@jazanu.edu.sa)
  • Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103

    Received: March 27, 2023 Revised: June 16, 2023 Accepted: August 22, 2023
    Abstract

    Due to the complexity and unpredictability of today's globalized business world, managing an international business administration (IBAS) is not without its share of risks. The necessity of efficient risk management in international business administrations is highlighted, and a summary of the main hazards that companies encounter when doing business across borders is provided in this paper. The political, economic, legal, cultural, operational, financial, compliance, competitive, environmental, sustainability, and cybersecurity risks are identified and categorized in the paper as the most significant risks in international company administrations. It stresses how important it is to recognize and manage these threats to international corporate success and longevity. This article examines the effects of political risks on international commerce, including political instability, changes in government policy, and trade barriers. It draws attention to economic risks that might have an impact on pricing, profitability, and financial performance, such as swings in exchange rates, inflation, and economic instability. This work applied the neutrosophic set with multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) models to rank the risks in IBAS. This paper used the neutrosophic MABAC and neutrosophic COPRAS methods to rank these risks. These methods are compared with the PROMETHEE method. The results show the suggested technique is an effective model to deal with this kind of problem.

    Keywords :

    Neutrosophic Set , MABAC , COPRAS , PROMETHEE , Risks , MCDM

    References

    [1]        S. T. Cavusgil, G. Knight, J. R. Riesenberger, H. G. Rammal, and E. L. Rose, International business. Pearson Australia, 2014.

    [2]        J. J. Wild, K. L. Wild, and J. C. Y. Han, International business. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2003.

    [3]        R. Grosse and J. N. Behrman, “Theory in international business,” Transnatl. Corp., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 93–126, 1992.

    [4]        G. A. Knight and D. Kim, “International business competence and the contemporary firm,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 40, pp. 255–273, 2009.

    [5]        G. Hofstede, “The business of international business is culture,” Int. Bus. Rev., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 1994.

    [6]        M. R. Czinkota, I. A. Ronkainen, and M. H. Moffett, International business. Wiley, 2011.

    [7]        D. Pamučar and D. Božanić, Selection of a location for the development of multimodal logistics center: Application of single-valued neutrosophic MABAC model. Infinite Study, 2019.

    [8]        X. Peng and J. Dai, “Approaches to single-valued neutrosophic MADM based on MABAC, TOPSIS and new similarity measure with score function,” Neural Comput. Appl., vol. 29, pp. 939–954, 2018.

    [9]        Ç. Karamaşa, D. Karabasevic, D. Stanujkic, A. Kookhdan, A. Mishra, and M. Erturk, “An extended single-valued neutrosophic AHP and MULTIMOORA method to evaluate the optimal training aircraft for flight training organizations,” FACTA Univ. Mech. Eng., vol. 19, no. 3, 2021.

    [10]      D. Stanujkić et al., “A single-valued neutrosophic extension of the EDAS method,” Axioms, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 245, 2021.

    [11]      M. Jdid, F. Smarandache, and S. Broumi, “Inspection Assignment Form for Product Quality Control Using Neutrosophic Logic,” Neutrosophic Systems with Applications, vol. 1, pp. 4–13, 2023.

    [12]      H. Ran, “MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making under single-valued neutrosophic sets and applications to performance evaluation of sustainable microfinance groups lending,” PLoS One, vol. 18, no. 1, p. e0280239, 2023.

    [13]      R. Şahin and F. Altun, “Decision making with MABAC method under probabilistic single-valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy environment,” J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput., vol. 11, pp. 4195–4212, 2020.

    [14]      H. Garg, Algorithms for single-valued neutrosophic decision making based on TOPSIS and clustering methods with new distance measure. Infinite Study, 2020.

    [15]      G. Büyüközkan, E. Mukul, and E. Kongar, “Health tourism strategy selection via SWOT analysis and integrated hesitant fuzzy linguistic AHP-MABAC approach,” Socioecon. Plann. Sci., vol. 74, p. 100929, 2021.

    [16]      P. Rani, A. R. Mishra, R. Krishankumar, K. S. Ravichandran, and S. Kar, “Multi-criteria food waste treatment method selection using single-valued neutrosophic-CRITIC-MULTIMOORA framework,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 111, p. 107657, 2021.

    [17]      D. Xu, H. Xian, X. Cui, and Y. Hong, A new single-valued neutrosophic distance for TOPSIS, MABAC and new similarity measure in multi-attribute decision-Making. Infinite Study, 2020.

    [18]      A. P. Darko and D. Liang, “An extended COPRAS method for multiattribute group decision making based on dual hesitant fuzzy Maclaurin symmetric mean,” Int. J. Intell. Syst., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1021–1068, 2020.

    [19]      K. Karahan, G. C. YALÇIN, and S. EDİNSEL, “Warehouse Manager Selection by CRITIC-MULTIMOORA Hybrid Method based on Single-Valued Neutrosophic Sets,” J. Marit. Transp. Logist., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 48–64, 2023.

    [20]      A. Abdel-Monem, N. A. Nabeeh, and M. Abouhawwash, “An Integrated Neutrosophic Regional Management Ranking Method for Agricultural Water Management,” Neutrosophic Systems with Applications, vol. 1, pp. 22–28, 2023.

    [21]      P. Rani and A. R. Mishra, “Novel single-valued neutrosophic combined compromise solution approach for sustainable waste electrical and electronics equipment recycling partner selection,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 3139–3153, 2020.

    [22]      P. Wang, J. Wang, G. Wei, C. Wei, and Y. Wei, “The multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) for multiple attribute group decision making under 2-tuple linguistic neutrosophic environment,” Informatica, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 799–818, 2019.

    [23]      Z. Yang, X. Wang, and C. Su, “A review of research methodologies in international business,” Int. Bus. Rev., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 601–617, 2006.

    [24]      S. T. Cavusgil, G. A. Knight, and J. R. Riesenberger, International business: Strategy, management, and the new realities. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008.

    [25]      P. Ghemawat, “Semiglobalization and international business strategy,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 34, pp. 138–152, 2003.

    [26]      O. Shenkar, Y. Luo, and T. Chi, International business. Routledge, 2021.

    [27]      Y. Luo, “A general framework of digitization risks in international business,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 344–361, 2022.

    [28]      C. Hill, “International business: Competing in the global market place,” Strateg. Dir., vol. 24, no. 9, 2008.

    [29]      J. G. Frynas and K. Mellahi, “Political risks as firm‐specific (dis) advantages: Evidence on transnational oil firms in Nigeria,” Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 541–565, 2003.

    [30]      R. W. Click, “Financial and political risks in US direct foreign investment,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 36, pp. 559–575, 2005.

    [31]      J. C. Y. How, M. A. Karim, and P. Verhoeven, “Islamic financing and bank risks: the case of Malaysia,” Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 75–94, 2005.

    [32]      L. Zhuang, R. Ritchie, and Q. Zhang, “Managing business risks in China,” Long Range Plann., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 606–614, 1998.

    [33]      W. Shan, “Environmental risks and joint venture sharing arrangements,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 22, pp. 555–578, 1991.

    [34]      N. Boso, I. Adeleye, K. Ibeh, and A. Chizema, “The internationalization of African firms: Opportunities, challenges, and risks,” Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev., vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 5–12, 2019.

    [35]      J. Amankwah-Amoah and X. Wang, “Opening editorial: Contemporary business risks: An overview and new research agenda,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 97. Elsevier, pp. 208–211, 2019.

    [36]      M. Kotabe, “Global security risks and international competitiveness,” J. Int. Manag., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 453–455, 2005.

    [37]      H. Meissner, State capture, political risks and international business: Cases from black sea region countries. Taylor & Francis, 2016.

    [38]      X. Peng and J. Dai, “Hesitant fuzzy soft decision making methods based on WASPAS, MABAC and COPRAS with combined weights,” J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1313–1325, 2017.

    [39]      D. Zhang, M. Zhao, G. Wei, and X. Chen, “Single-valued neutrosophic TODIM method based on cumulative prospect theory for multi-attribute group decision making and its application to medical emergency management evaluation,” Econ. Res. istraživanja, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 4520–4536, 2022.

    Cite This Article As :
    Abdulrahman, Ather. A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration. Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, vol. 22, no. 1, 2023, pp. 31-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103
    Abdulrahman, A. (2023). A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration. Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, 22( 1), 31-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103
    Abdulrahman, Ather. A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration. Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science 22, no. 1 (2023): 31-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103
    Abdulrahman, A. (2023) . A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration. Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science , 22( 1) , 31-44 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103
    Abdulrahman A. [2023]. A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration. Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science. 22( 1): 31-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103
    Abdulrahman, A. "A New Hybrid Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Methodology Model for Ranking Risks in International Business Administration," Journal of International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 31-44, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220103